Law Enforcement Against Prohibition

Page 1 of 5 123 ... Last
  1. lutherblsstt
    lutherblsstt's Avatar

    Law Enforcement Against Prohibition


    Many police officers are asking the question: if prohibition didn't work for alcohol, why are we in denial about it working for other things

    YouTube - Law Enforcement Against Prohibition


  2. Just to add

    COPS SAY LEGALIZE DRUGS!
    ASK US WHY
    After nearly four decades of fueling the U.S. policy of a war on drugs with over a trillion tax dollars and 37 million arrests for nonviolent drug offenses, our confined population has quadrupled making building prisons the fastest growing industry in the United States. More than 2.2 million of our citizens are currently incarcerated and every year we arrest an additional 1.9 million more guaranteeing those prisons will be bursting at their seams. Every year we choose to continue this war will cost U.S. taxpayers another 69 billion dollars. Despite all the lives we have destroyed and all the money so ill spent, today illicit drugs are cheaper, more potent, and far easier to get than they were 35 years ago at the beginning of the war on drugs. Meanwhile, people continue dying in our streets while drug barons and terrorists continue to grow richer than ever before. We would suggest that this scenario must be the very definition of a failed public policy. This madness must cease!
    Applied Nutriceuticals Representative
    www.appliednutriceuticals.com

    FACEBOOK FAN PAGE:
    http://www.facebook.com/pages/Applie...ls/64122223218
    •   
       


  3. I bet I can find more cops saying they shouldn't be legalized... Decminalized, maybe. Just providing a source of opinion doesn't make it right or factual.

  4. Quote Originally Posted by Jayhawkk View Post
    I bet I can find more cops saying they shouldn't be legalized... Decminalized, maybe. Just providing a source of opinion doesn't make it right or factual.
    That's because the argument for drug legalization is counter-intuitive. Between the heavy propaganda that started during the Nixon era and with continued violence associated with the drug trade of course most people's immediate reaction is going to be against it. Having looked into it in a lot more depth, from purely an economics stand point, legalizing (and not just decriminalizing) drugs will end cartels and gangs by completely cutting off their income streams. I've heard some very good well thought out arguments and plausible ways of implementing that policy that make so much more sense than continuing this failed policy. Both of my parents are in law enforcement and after my explanation, changed their minds about it.

  5. You always hear great arguments but none have ever been put into effect or if they have they haven't worked. You also have to look at what scale they're talking. Switzerland isn't the US. In size or culture. Cartels and drug runners aren't in it for the drugs they're in it for the money which means if that source of income dries up they'll move to the next source. This logic pretty much uses the theory that everything will be okay with no law or governing body. it's all fine and good until you're a victim. then you want action.

    I've seen plenty of arguments for decriminalization and many make sense, to me. I have yet to see any that make sense for legalization. those also vary according to the particular type of drug they want legalized.
    •   
       


  6. This is a black and white society...decriminalization is too complex a concept for most to understand.

    "Well, is it legal or ain't it?"
    Evolutionary Muse - Inspire to Evolve
    Flawless Skin Couture - We give you the tools to make you Flawless
  7. dpfisher
    dpfisher's Avatar

    Most police won't support this but not because it's wrong. The drug war allows them to take peoples' property even if that property wasn't bought with drug money. It also allows them to obtain funding for APCs and other urban tank type things and equip paramilitary assault forces in places with no violent crime.

  8. Quote Originally Posted by dpfisher View Post
    Most police won't support this but not because it's wrong. The drug war allows them to take peoples' property even if that property wasn't bought with drug money. It also allows them to obtain funding for APCs and other urban tank type things and equip paramilitary assault forces in places with no violent crime.
    Valid point....any organization with power, by it's very nature, has the first priority of EXPANDING or PROTECTING it's power.
    Evolutionary Muse - Inspire to Evolve
    Flawless Skin Couture - We give you the tools to make you Flawless

  9. I don't know how valid a point that is. Most of those large and expensive items are subsidized through larger gov't. Not through propert taken. Monies and proprty recovered isn't always put back through the police system. Part so it does but I doubt that's the top reason for taking property since its attourneys that do the actual taking.

    I will say money isn't monitored closely enough in where it's spent and too many depts want the cool new thing over what is needed for their jurisdiction. No different than any other angency or employee out there.


  10. Quote Originally Posted by Jayhawkk View Post
    You always hear great arguments but none have ever been put into effect or if they have they haven't worked. You also have to look at what scale they're talking. Switzerland isn't the US. In size or culture.
    How can you say that when this country already tried to prohibit alcohol and decided to legalize and tax it instead. Sure we still have issues with it, but you don't have the crime associated with the black market, which is one of the leading arguments.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jayhawkk View Post
    Cartels and drug runners aren't in it for the drugs they're in it for the money which means if that source of income dries up they'll move to the next source. This logic pretty much uses the theory that everything will be okay with no law or governing body. it's all fine and good until you're a victim. then you want action.
    Obviously they're in it for the money, but the reason drugs are so profitable is because of the mark ups. Cocaine is the most marked up product in circulation above 1000%. Combine that with the addictive nature of drugs and you have an obvious demand.

    So what's left on the black market after drugs? Bookies? Prostitution? Guns? Extortion? Robberies? Ransom Kidnapping? What illegal/ black market business model is as profitable and easy for the street gangs of the world to get into? I don't disagree there are other illegal black market ventures that this elements will go to, but nothing on the same playing field as the drug trade.
  11. lutherblsstt
    lutherblsstt's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by badfish51581 View Post
    That's because the argument for drug legalization is counter-intuitive. Between the heavy propaganda that started during the Nixon era and with continued violence associated with the drug trade of course most people's immediate reaction is going to be against it. Having looked into it in a lot more depth, from purely an economics stand point, legalizing (and not just decriminalizing) drugs will end cartels and gangs by completely cutting off their income streams. I've heard some very good well thought out arguments and plausible ways of implementing that policy that make so much more sense than continuing this failed policy. Both of my parents are in law enforcement and after my explanation, changed their minds about it.
    You are right on:

    http://www.newsdaily.com/stories/tre52a44i-us-drugs-un/
    Anti-narcotics drive has fuelled drug cartels: U.N.

    VIENNA, Mar. 11, 2009 (Reuters) — A U.N. anti-narcotics drive has backfired in part by making drug cartels so rich they can bribe their way through West Africa and Central America, U.N. crime agency chief Antonio Maria Costa said on Wednesday.

    The 10-year "war on drugs" campaign had cut drug output and the number of users, he said. But it had a "dramatic unintended consequence" -- profit-gorged trafficking gangs destabilizing nations already plagued by poverty and joblessness.

    When mafias can buy elections, candidates, political parties, in a word, power, the consequences can only be highly destabilizing," Costa, head of the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime , told a U.N. drug policy review meeting.

    [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YMAs6o9sCy4"]YouTube - Time to Legalize Drugs? Ethan Nadelmann on FOX News[/ame]

  12. You don't think legal drugs would still have black market versions as soon as any restictions/taxes are placed on them? Now you'll just have to fight illegal versions over legsl versions. It'll just be a different fight.

    My point that making an illegal drug legal in today's society is a theory best not tested. While you use prohibition as a way to fight for your cause I use it as a way to fight against it. prohibition didn't work because alcohol had become too ingrained in that society that they were not willing to let it go and were willing to risk brain damage and death to get their high in large numbers. As soon as you let loose the floodgates on drugs and there's a mistake to be made, there's no turning back.

    I support decriminalization.

    Since there is no large scale, successful model that can argue your side and my argument can't be won by the same token it just comes down to arguing two opinions.
  13. lutherblsstt
    lutherblsstt's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by Jayhawkk View Post
    You don't think legal drugs would still have black market versions as soon as any restictions/taxes are placed on them? Now you'll just have to fight illegal versions over legsl versions. It'll just be a different fight.

    My point that making an illegal drug legal in today's society is a theory best not tested. While you use prohibition as a way to fight for your cause I use it as a way to fight against it. prohibition didn't work because alcohol had become too ingrained in that society that they were not willing to let it go and were willing to risk brain damage and death to get their high in large numbers. As soon as you let loose the floodgates on drugs and there's a mistake to be made, there's no turning back.

    I support decriminalization.

    Since there is no large scale, successful model that can argue your side and my argument can't be won by the same token it just comes down to arguing two opinions.
    Decriminalization,got ya. Good idea.Like the Netherlands.

  14. Where in anything that I have written does it say continue down the exact same path that we're on now? I agree with what the Fox clip you posted said. The answer is probably somewhere in the middle but it isn't something that can just be thrown out there. it'll have to be slowly tested and observed to make sure we don't, with good intentions, make things even worse than they are now.

  15. I just don't believe the answer is "this currently doesn't work so let's destroy it completely and go with something 180 degrees different".
  16. lutherblsstt
    lutherblsstt's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by Jayhawkk View Post
    Where in anything that I have written does it say continue down the exact same path that we're on now? I agree with what the Fox clip you posted said. The answer is probably somewhere in the middle but it isn't something that can just be thrown out there. it'll have to be slowly tested and observed to make sure we don't, with good intentions, make things even worse than they are now.


    They cannot get much worse:

    U.S. Leads The World In Illegal Drug Use
    http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/...n4222322.shtml

  17. That's the difference between your opinion and mine. I've seen first hand on a personal and professional level on how much worse it can get. I don't see an advantage of legalizing drugs to the potential users as much as lower crowded prisons with users/dealers that still could of led a decent lifestyle.
  18. lutherblsstt
    lutherblsstt's Avatar

    The war on drugs has long been, in large part, about money. The urge to control intoxicants has been one of the greatest powers driving economies for centuries. We all know about the Dutch and British East India companies. The Mayans and Aztecs used cacao for money. Chocolate contains caffeine, theobromine and anandamide – which has a similar effect to marijuana’s THC. Today, coffee remains dominant in commerce, second only to oil.

    In the nineteenth century, China was home to the Opium Wars – this time, force was used to keep drug markets open, not closed.

    The key is there is demand for drugs, and so there shall be supply. If drugs are restricted, we will have human misery, but people will pay more or find other intoxicating alternatives. Most modern drug abuse has probably been with pharmaceuticals, anyway – barbiturates, benzodiazepines, etc.
  19. dpfisher
    dpfisher's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by Jayhawkk View Post
    I don't know how valid a point that is. Most of those large and expensive items are subsidized through larger gov't. Not through propert taken. Monies and proprty recovered isn't always put back through the police system. Part so it does but I doubt that's the top reason for taking property since its attourneys that do the actual taking.

    I will say money isn't monitored closely enough in where it's spent and too many depts want the cool new thing over what is needed for their jurisdiction. No different than any other angency or employee out there.

    Yeah, I agree with that. Most places are getting the money from anti-drug funding through federal grants. There are places that pretty much completely fund themselves off drug seizures too. A very few of them are probably legit seizures of some major gang leader too, I just have issue with them selling Johnny Dimebag's house and car just because he was selling a little of his stash to his friends down the street. Take away everything someone owns when they already have used illegal means to make money and then expect them to start and hold down a normal job with no possessions or transportation? That doesn't help him or society as a whole at all.

  20. just like what jayhawk said...cartels are in it for the money...so is the government! they all know who the drug dealers are but they insist and busting the little guy!

    removing the stigmata from drugs my help prevent future users.

    i do think the government should capitalize off of it from a taxpayer standpoint. american black market has got to be the larger than any american corporation and operates tax free. nationwide flat sales tax...but thats another subject!

  21. Quote Originally Posted by lutherblsstt View Post
    They cannot get much worse:

    U.S. Leads The World In Illegal Drug Use
    http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/...n4222322.shtml
    You are such an idiot, its amazing. We also lead the world in per capita income, per capita use of fossil fuels, etc. Things can always get significantly worse, and drug use would not go DOWN if it was legalized.

  22. Quote Originally Posted by badfish51581 View Post
    How can you say that when this country already tried to prohibit alcohol and decided to legalize and tax it instead. Sure we still have issues with it, but you don't have the crime associated with the black market, which is one of the leading arguments.
    The problem with that was that alchohol was legal for a LONG time before being made illegal. With most of the drugs that are illegal now they have never been legal. Once you go that direction, and 1/4 of the population are users, its impossible to go back.

  23. Quote Originally Posted by EasyEJL View Post
    The problem with that was that alchohol was legal for a LONG time before being made illegal. With most of the drugs that are illegal now they have never been legal. Once you go that direction, and 1/4 of the population are users, its impossible to go back.
    false.


  24. Quote Originally Posted by dsade View Post
    false.

    Not sure which piece you think is false. Beer glorious beer dates back to before the birth of christ, distilled alchohol to the 12th century or so. heroin? needed to have needles for heroin, so much later. cocaine? crack? also later. As well, the process of creating heroin or cocaine isn't quite so easy to do from raw materials in the home as making beer or wine is.

    And historically once a government allows free access to something, ever taking it away again even if it is causing huge problems is almost impossible.

    I'd have no problems with the legalization of drugs if all felony crimes against persons carried a death penalty, and if there were no food stamps, section 8 housing, welfare etc that eat my income up via taxes so that the addicts can stay high all day long.

  25. Quote Originally Posted by EasyEJL View Post
    Not sure which piece you think is false. Beer glorious beer dates back to before the birth of christ, distilled alchohol to the 12th century or so. heroin? needed to have needles for heroin, so much later. cocaine? crack? also later. As well, the process of creating heroin or cocaine isn't quite so easy to do from raw materials in the home as making beer or wine is.

    And historically once a government allows free access to something, ever taking it away again even if it is causing huge problems is almost impossible.

    I'd have no problems with the legalization of drugs if all felony crimes against persons carried a death penalty, and if there were no food stamps, section 8 housing, welfare etc that eat my income up via taxes so that the addicts can stay high all day long.
    cocaine, pot, LSD, ecstasy, meth and heroin were all legal...and you do not need needles for heroin.


  26. Most illegal drugs were once legal and many were considered remedies


  27. Quote Originally Posted by dsade View Post
    cocaine, pot, LSD, ecstasy, meth and heroin were all legal...and you do not need needles for heroin.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jayhawkk View Post
    Most illegal drugs were once legal and many were considered remedies

    Right, but alchohol was used for far longer, and was and is considered a part of daily life for many, both before + after (and during) prohibition. the use of most of those is far more recent, and isn't as culturally ingrained except for perhaps psychedelic mushrooms and a few other similar things that were in use by american indians and some other groups for religious observances.

  28. Quote Originally Posted by EasyEJL View Post
    Right, but alchohol was used for far longer, and was and is considered a part of daily life for many, both before + after (and during) prohibition. the use of most of those is far more recent, and isn't as culturally ingrained except for perhaps psychedelic mushrooms and a few other similar things that were in use by american indians and some other groups for religious observances.
    and it is easily taxable.

    I wasn't disagreeing with this point, just your erroneous statement that most drugs have never been legal.


  29. Quote Originally Posted by dsade View Post
    and it is easily taxable.

    I wasn't disagreeing with this point, just your erroneous statement that most drugs have never been legal.

    Ah true, I suppose my thought was more around that they weren't legal for as long of a time or such an ingrained part of life, but what I wrote was never. I could use some coffee, this mornings workout was rough

    But i'm all for legalization, so long as no money out of my taxes goes to drug users, or their families. Thats the bigger problem is that with "progressive" policies effectively all we do is create larger and larger population groups that are unproductive economically, and tax the smaller and smaller groups higher to pay for benefits to the unproductive. Eventually it becomes untenable, as you have to have a constantly growing population for it to work even in the shorter term. It will be interesting to see what happens to germany over the next 10-20 years as they struggle with birth rates below replacement, and how that affects GDP.

  30. if you put a .45 in the skull of every crack dealer, even if only suspected, drugs would be less of an issue. The war on drugs is the right thing to do. Its just they are doing it wrong, execute them on the spot. Or have public executions.
  •   

      
     

Similar Forum Threads

  1. Replies: 57
    Last Post: 08-13-2010, 08:11 AM
  2. Law enforcement and SERMS
    By JT54 in forum Post Cycle Therapy
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 12-12-2009, 11:58 PM
  3. Law Enforcement and Steroids
    By poopypants in forum Anabolics
    Replies: 35
    Last Post: 05-30-2007, 12:08 PM
  4. End Prohibition
    By foo.c in forum Politics
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 11-06-2005, 09:20 AM
  5. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 10-25-2005, 08:12 PM
Log in
Log in